TheCat

If faced with a fine, you can always just trot out the excuse that plenty of twa..sorry, 'motorists' believe is an excuse to break every road or parking rule under the sun...."Im just dropping my kids off"..... ....apparently it works in all situations...double yellow? No problem.....block a whole lane of traffic while you 'dash-in'?, no problem...Park over a local resident's drive? No problem.... Stop both lanes of traffic while you pull across oncoming traffic to stop on the wrong side of the road? No problem....etc etc Ok (slightly niche) rant over:) I say this as a parent of school aged children as well...but the entitlement of some motoring parents at dropoff and pickup is quite breathtaking sometimes.

alex_b Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > JohnL Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I see perhaps a federal system if Scotland > doesn't > > leave. > > > > If you really have 4 equal countries then one > > can't make all the decisions. > > It?s hard to have four equal countries if one is > ten times the size of the others. Absolutely, you cant have a federalized model with England being so much larger than the other parts of the UK....just not sustainable. Even with English devolvement being a feature...I just cant see it working effectively. Perhaps you could split England up 'Game of Thrones' style.....i.e. The North etc etc...I thin Boris might fancy himself as King of the Seven Kingdoms, first of his name, protector of the realm:)

Both sides are arguing and disagreeing about who's adhering to the agreement properly or not. That's typically how these things work, both sides push the envelope as I said. It's informative that you automatically assume that the EU is doing the right thing, and the UK is at fault. Can't really have much of a productive discussion when that's the default position you start from on any dispute. Also....this line of argument that people who voted leave are all now 'surprised' the UK is being treated like a third country is growing tiresome. Yes, the UK is a third country as far as the EU is concerned...that will sometimes involve disputes, arguments and (hopefully) resolutions, as it does between any nations who are not in a customs union (I.e. most nations on earth)...that's not a suprise.

Seabag Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sephiroth Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Global Britain going well I see > > > > purely from a self-interested pov, Uk shouldn't > be > > fostering bad-will like this? > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/13/e > > > > u-citizens-arriving-in-uk-being-locked-up-and-expe > > > lled > > You have to bear in mind, that there?s some people > who like this kind of behaviour going on. Some of > them even post on this forum. > > Sending strong messages to those wishing to come > here, kinda floats their boats. > > It?s what they voted for, and it?s being > delivered. This is clearly unacceptable, and needs to to be fixed asap. But can we please move away from this narrative that the UK is the only one doing anything wrong or pushing the envelope, and no matter what transpires, apparently..'this is what they voted for'...(Everytime the EU makes a mis-step (and there have been many) I don't think it's always fair to claim that is what YOU voted for) I mean, how about the French purposefully holding up the deal that was about to be announced for financial services becuase they want better access for their fisherman to UK waters. If this was the UK doing this, I'm sure you'd be on here saying that they shouldn't have signed the TCA on fishing if they weren't happy with it...and now they're trying to renegotiate, becuase they agreed to a rubbish deal... https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/no-10-government-eu-france-delay-city-deal-fishing-brexit-b934950.html%3famp

A bit of a long read this one...but it's Tony Blair writing in the New Statesman about the fundamental challenges he sees for Labour (and progressives more broadly) It's all fairly high-level, and the practicalities of implementing his suggestions are not easy, but makes sense to me. Key takeaway is encapsulated by the following... "The progressive problem is that, in an era where people want change in a changing world, and a fairer, better and more prosperous future, the radical progressives aren?t sensible and the sensible aren?t radical. The choice is therefore between those who fail to inspire hope and those who inspire as much fear as hope" https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2021/05/tony-blair-without-total-change-labour-will-die

alex_b Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think the objection to the concept is that the > UK doesn?t have a tradition of compulsory ID - > indeed the current Prime Minister and his party > were vocally opposed to them - voting is a > fundamental democratic right and therefore > requiring ID to vote is making ID compulsory by > the backdoor. This is a fundamental shift in the > relationship between the state and the citizen and > properly be debated. Personally I?m not against a > national ID programme if it is done competently, > securely and equitably - but others will disagree > and that?s a debate to be had in the round not > over a strawman of voter fraud. > > The other point is the brazenly cynical nature of > this proposal. We have a Conservative party who > have campaigned against ID cards, have no evidence > of in person voter fraud and have presided over > the systematic denial of citizenship rights to > elderly Caribbean immigrants - claiming that a > measure shown to suppress voter turnout in poorer > areas is necessary to safeguard our elections. > It?s an attempt at voter suppression pure and > simple - surely you must see that? > > As for the experience in other countries - I don?t > know what evidence there is that ID requirements > don?t suppress turnout, it certainly does when it > has been introduced in US states especially > amongst black and Latino voters. European > countries have had compulsory ID cards for decades > along with very different voting systems, and so > it?s simply impossible to cherry pick one part of > their national infrastructure and say ?it works ok > there should be fine here?. > > And no that isn?t British exceptionalism, if > anything it?s expecting any attempt to do this in > the UK to be done in the cheapest, least competent > way to give a show of protecting voters while > really achieving the aim of stopping younger, > poorer, people of colour voting. Fair enough. I come from what is widely regarded as a 'nanny state'...so have less conceptual problem accepting the idea of universal ID, particularly to vote. My bias is to say that if people want to exercise their democratic right to vote, then its not that much of an ask to get organised and get yourself an ID. But I appreciate that others feel very differently (as evidenced above), and this is of course all dependent on how easy/free/safeguarded the process to get the right ID is made (I don't disagree with concerns that this govt will probably make a half-hearted, sh!tty attempt at an easy process). So I do hear and appreciate the concerns raised...and wont argue the point any further as I dont really feel strongly enough on it to do so....but appreciate the insight into britsh mentality on the issue (and for the civil discussion!)

I should point out that it's only certain states in Australia where you require ID to vote, and I think federal elections still don't require it to this day Voting is compulsory,as you point out, and the list of acceptable ID is very long, and includes non-photo ID's, and there are provisions from various govt departments to provide certification for people who cannot provide the required ID. I guess I'd say that all your concerns above must have also been faced in all the other countries that do require photo ID...and they all got through it somehow (are you claiming British exceptionalism?:)). In anycase...it sounds like your objection is not around the requirement for ID per se, but the provisions made for people who don't have the most common forms of ID.... Is there a reason why the criticism seems to focused on the concept of requiring ID, rather than on the process for ensuring people have access to it?

I totally agree that there are bigger issues for the govt to focus on. But I'm genuinely amazed at the level of opposition to the voter ID thing. I say this from a totally non-partisan perspective, when first coming from Australia, I was totally shocked to find that you don't require ID to vote here. I mean...most modern democracies (Canada, NZ, Sweden, Norway, Germany, France etc etc) all require photo ID to vote. Surely this is just catching up with the rest of the world?....and should be very much a non issue. I would say that just as the govt has other things it should focus on as a priority, so too should govt opponents have better things to criticise them about....

alex_b Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Which paper should she have written it in? The > ones owned by Lord Rothermere, the ones owns by > Rupert Murdoch or the one owned by the Barclay > family? Anyway, as you know, those op eds are > written for the broadcast media to report on not > because anybody seriously believes they?ll > directly change the mind of the readers of a > newspaper. Not everything has to be a fight you know....Im sorry if lighthearted spirit in which the post was intended wasnt obvious enough.

So Angela Rayner has written an article about how her party is going to win back northern working class voters....and published it in...The Guardian....:) More a pitch to the membership than the electorate one would think.....

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A reshuffle doesn't necessarily equate to > sackings, as most of the media would like you to > believe. At some point, Labour supporters will have to realise its not always the medias fault:).....As I think we could say that Angela Rayner and her team have played the media like a fiddle over the weekend....

Could he have handled the first 48 hours or so post election results any worse?

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Jazzer what Britain needed was cross party working > to sort out the Brexit deal, and cross party > working last March to properly tackle Covid. This. 100 percent.

alex_b Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Loutwo Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > It?s simple. Labour is appeasing two camps. > Metro > > socialists and traditional working classes. > Metro > > socialists are over represented at > parliamentary > > level, and a perception (rightly or wrongly) > has > > festered in the mind?s of some of those > > traditional old industrial communities, that > > Labour doesn?t represent their opinions anymore. > > > This interestingly exposes the definitional flaw > at the heart of the discussion here. "Traditional > working classes" as used here seems to include a > large groups of people who do not work (retired > homeowners on defined benefit pensions in the > towns of the North and Midlands) while excluding > large groups who do work (younger people in larger > cities - including London - often in unstable > employment). It just so happens that the > 'traditional working class' are white while those > working in cities who don't count as working class > tend to be more diverse. > > So when the media talks about Labour losing touch > with 'working people' what they mean is losing > touch with older socially conservative white > people who once worked. There is little evidence > that I have seen that Labour is losing support > amongst younger working voters (in fact I believe > their share of vote amongst under 40s is > increasing). > > Of course electorally this is a huge problem for > Labour and will get worse as red-wall type seats > continue to age and depopulate. I don't know what > Labour do about this, it seems tough to think they > can out socially conservative the Tories as Louisa > seems to suggest. Just catching up with the London mayoral election result detail....and seems like the above doesn't really jell with sadiq having his margin cut in london. Yes, he won handsomely, but the swing away from him (and to a candidate who basically had his funding slashed from Tory HQ a month out from the elections) suggests there may be more to it for Labour than just a redistrbution of demographics as discussed above (of course this clearly is a key driver as well)....

apols. Perhaps a I was a shade too subtle on my spoof post above... Although a collection of mobile phones flash-lights could easily replace the Olympic torch, no? :)

WIth the exception of team sports/tennis etc...the major sports can all be done via zoom.... 100m is 100m no matter what country you're in.. Even the opening ceremony could work...each team could march 400m in their home country...and just switch on a virtual background of mt fuji or similar...

Good question. I agree something has changed int he past 30 odd years. A couple of wild theories.... - Ever-presence of Mainstream media - So not specifically to do with bias per se (as was referred above), but just that absolutley everything gets reported on and blown out of proportion, as media outlets need far more content than they did last century to compete in an oversaturated media marketplace. I.e. 30 years ago, would we really have seen the same volume of clips of therasa may during the 2017 election to brand her a 'robot'? - Rise of social media - I've said this plenty of times on here. But the rise of everyone having a platform to express whatever crazy view they want has just accelerated the tribalism and partisanship of modern politics. It has also amplified the importance of 'personality' as there's only so much people can discuss policy before losing interest. - Culture wars - this will likely be a more controversial point, but if you feel that neither major party is doing much for you. But if you feel one of them (including their outriders) is calling you stupid/rascist/priveliged and sort of looks down on you...and the other is not....then competence probably matters less than emotion.

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Quite Sephiroth. The disenfranchised have been > failed by both parties in recent decades. > > It seems to go like this at the moment. Starmer > has a pint in a working class pub, and he is > patronising the working classes. Boris or Farage > do that, and they are standing with the common > people. That is the narrative the BBC for example, > have been pumping out for some time now. Labour, > talking to themselves, too metropolitan, middle > class etc. Boris meanwhile, an old Etonian, > nothing in common with ordinary people, and not a > peep about that. > > So while impression matters and sticks, you have > to blame the media for creating those impressions > and making them stick too. The fact is that the > media is owned by people with vested interests in > maintaining a Conservative status Quo. Labour, no > matter what they do, are always on the back foot > as a result. Yes these are all impressions. But if most people are being honest Sir Kier, when at the pub or interacting with 'common people', looks about as comfortable as a pig at a BBQ. For all Boris's many faults, you can't deny he is an electioneering/campaigning machine, and one of the skills of that is appearing comfortable and at ease with having that pint in a working class pub - and still managing to do that even though people know he went to Eton etc. I think blaming the media is missing the point here. Sir Kier has a reall challenge ahead, as even if he gets a handle on his own party, the 'impression' I have is that Labour will conduct focus groups etc to basically work out what they should say to disenfranchised former labour voters. And, yes, all parties use the same tools, but for whatever reason, many people will still have the impression that Sir Kier is saying it becuase he has been told to say it. Whereas they will believe that Boris is genuine, even if the same mechanics have been used by both parties to get to the key message...frustrating for some...but it's a key skill of all the more electable politicians...think Blair as a great example, and think Theresa May as an awful example. So labour need to find someone that has skill.... While I would agree that I wish competence was a key criteria, the reality is that it is not. And labour would do well to realise this....surely they can dig someone up that has competence AND charisma...

The Jersey govt have basically now admitted that they incorrectly applied the licensing versus what is outlined in the TCA.... Fisherman protested against the jersey. Jersey have acknowledged their misunderstanding/mis-execution, and agreed that they will work it out. End of storm in teacup. Both the French and the British didn't help matters, and neither should have got involved. Nothing to see here.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you want an answer to why the Labour Party > keeps losing just google ?Hartlepool? and ? thick? > this morning. Doomed if so many of its vocal and > activist supporters hate this country and the > people they claim to represent. Unfort for Labour this is the age-old problem with much of the left....they have 'good' and 'right' on their side, so they are never wrong, its the voters who are wrong...over and over again apparently..... To be fair thought the statement from the Labour party this morning did seem to acknowledge they need to change. I wont hold my breath though.

Its seems that many people on all sides of politics thinks that anyone 'challenging' politicians that they personally support are making biased and unfair attacks. Case in point.....the mean old media versus poor old Jezza Corbyn....

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No. Labour can't get anywhere near power becuase > they're usually just a bit sh1t. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/04/labour-tories-voters-keir-starmer Discuss......

So, I'm amazed that others cn accept that they are there overnight.....

Thats comprehensive...and fair....

What does the forum make of the hartlepool poll stats. And Sir Kier's effective concession. Despite my views on some things on here. I genuinely want labour to be a strong, effective alternative govt. But running an arch remainer (who lost a nearby seat in 2019) in a strong leave seat??? I don't want this to be another brexit debate....but surely that's just pig headed stupid.....? And to be fair. It's only a poll. The vote may be different.